Lessig Decides Not to Run For Congress

micheas writes "Larry Lessig has decided that running for U.S. Congress himself in a special election would be too risky to his Change Congress movement and has decided not to run. 'With lots of mixed feelings, I have decided a run for Congress would not help the Change Congress movement. I explain the thinking in this 5 minute video (a new record for me!). First question: What happens to the contributions to Lessig08? As explained on the ActBlue page, all will go to (the yet to be established) Change Congress organization.'"

Comments

Bait and Switch

[Anonymous Coward]

Either run, or send our money back.

Re:Bait and Switch

[ajs]

I'm sorry, can you please provide the list of the previous candidates whose campaigns have returned funds when they decided to drop out of the race?

I've never heard of that happening before, and while I think it would be rather slimy to simply take the funds for his own personal gain, there's nothing wrong with donating them to the cause he was running to support.

Re:Bait and Switch

[Zeinfeld]

I gave up two minutes in. Did he actually manage to make a substantive statement?

But I can't feel too bad for folk who parted with their money on the expectation that he was going to run before he told us some pretty important information like, which party ticket? if as an independent then who would he vote for as speaker?

The party system exists for a reason and its not all bad. Saying that you are going to change congress without saying how or why is just more rhetorical bullshit. Bush delivered that message in 2000, right down to the fix washington pledge. Obama is somewhat guilty of the same, but he does at least have an extensive platform where he explains his actual positions. McCain has nothing I could find on the Internet, Obama has a platform that was clearly written by someone with a clue.

Lessig, well hasn't told me diddly. He could be a Republican for all he has told me. All I know about him for sure is that he became very well known on the net in the wake of being appointed special master in the MSFT trial, being rejected by the Appeals court and then reappointed and then rejected a second time. Made him really popular on slashdot when they thought Jackson was doing them a favor, looks rather less impressive in retrospect.

He has milked his appeal since, come up with some provocative statements on IPR that play well to his base. But what is his position on the other 98% of issues before Congress?

In short are we really sure that we are not buying a Nader type figure here? Well we are now because he is stepping down. But if he had continued the run the most likely outcome would be that he would split the progressive vote and let a Republican in.

Of course Nader's decision to run might well be the reason he decided not to.

Come on

[riceboy50]

The guy never committed to running. If you are upset about having contributed, then you are being unreasonable. I am just sorry that he decided not to run—maybe he will change his mind someday.

Good move

[HaeMaker]

I think he can do more work as an outsider than an insider. This is also the reason I was disappointed that Al Franken decided to run for Senate. I was of the opinion he can do more work, reach more people, and effect greater change on the radio than in the Senate.

This also makes him available for appointment to some post in the White House. Imagine the work he could do in Commerce, overseeing the Internet, at the FCC overseeing information flow, or at Justice, overseeing IP-related enforcement.

redundant

[howdoesth]

Oh, wait, I mean the other thing - insightful

Why start so high?

[Dolohov]

He's going to run into this problem time and again if he continues to focus on Congress: there is always someone with more experience in the state legislature itching for a "promotion". Why not start by collecting a handful of people and run them for state legislature?

I dislike this notion that anything below the federal level is not worth their attention. True, it's not as bad as the Edwards or Nader position, "If I can't be president, I'm not going to bother." But if a new movement can prove itself on the local level, it can gain both the infrastructure and momentum necessary to advance.

silly notion

[TheSync]

There is no hope for "getting money out of politics" any more than there is hope for ending the drug war.

1971: Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA): contribution disclosure
1974: FECA expanded to limit contributions
2002: McCain-Feingold limits speech and soft money

Guess what? No big change.

Ron Paul raised $35 million, and he didn't see much in the way of votes.

Politicians love to spread anti-business rhetoric to get votes, but they all know that if they screw up the economy by destroying businesses they will lose those votes, thus they act more like economists in action, and talk like economically ignorant people on the stump.

Re:silly notion

[rohan972]

they all know that if they screw up the economy by destroying businesses they will lose those votes

In Australia, most employment is provided by SME's, I wouldn't be surprised if it is similar in the US. Making things harder for large corporations and easier for small business could well stimulate the economy rather than screw it up.